DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to an application filed with the US on 09/18/2023 and having an Effective Filing Date of 09/18/2023, in which claims 1-20 are pending and ready for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 18 SEPTEMPBER 2023 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and has/have been considered. An initialed copy of Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Claim Interpretation
"Hot stream" and "cold stream" and "hot medium compartment" and "cold medium compartment", respectively, are interpreted as relative to each other and not limited by any specific temperature ranges, i. e., the hot stream has a temperature higher than the cold stream and the hot medium compartment contains a medium at a temperature higher than the medium in the cold medium compartment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-7, 10-11, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0135439 (hereinafter “Alkhulaifi”) in view of US 2021/0077952 (hereinafter “Song”) and Mostafa Abd El-Rady Abu-Zeid, et al., A comprehensive review of vacuum membrane distillation technique, Desalination, Volume 356, 2015, Pages 1-14 (hereinafter “Abu-Zeid”).
Regarding Claim 1 Alkhulaifi discloses a desalination and cooling system (Abstract; Fig. 1A), comprising:
an ejector cooling cycle (ECC) system 170 ([0037], [0039]) comprising:
a generator 171 configured to generate a primary flow of a refrigerant ([0039]),
an evaporator 173 configured to provide cooling and provide a secondary flow of the refrigerant ([0039]),
an ejector 175 configured for the primary flow and the secondary flow to pass through to obtain a super-heated stream of the refrigerant ([0039]), and
a first condenser 177 configured to cool the super-heated stream of the refrigerant ([0039]); and
a desalination system 160 configured to receive a feed stream 127 comprising water (see [0024]; [0039]),
wherein the ECC system and the desalination system are connected at the first condenser so that the feed stream is heated by the superheated stream of the refrigerant at the first condenser before entering the desalination system (see [0011]; [0024]; [0049]).
Alkhulaifi does not disclose that the desalination system is a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system.
However Song discloses a similar desalination system which is integrated with a heat pump, where the desalination system and the heat pump system are connected at a condenser of the heat pump system to preheat a feed stream (see [0003]; [0017]; [0019]; [0059]), including (for direct contact membrane distillation, DCMD) a feed chamber 122 configured to receive a feed stream comprising water, a cold water/permeate chamber 123 configured to receive water vapors, and a membrane 121 disposed between the feed chamber and the cold water/permeate chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the cold water/permeate chamber (Fig. 1). Song specifically discloses the membrane distillation system may be direct contact, air gap, or vacuum membrane distillation (VMD), where the benefit of such is that it does not require heating water up to the boiling point, so a lower operating temperature contributes to energy cost savings (see [0005]; [0022]; [0072]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi to substitute for the desalination system a vacuum membrane distillation system, as suggested by Song, i.e. whose feed is first heated in the first condenser of the ECC system, in order to provide an energy efficient desalination system.
Alkhulaifi in view of Song does not disclose the specific details of the vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system including a vacuum chamber and second condenser as claimed.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from a direct contact membrane distillation system in that instead of a cold water/permeate chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD thus comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song to implement the VMD system for desalination by including instead of a cold water/permeate chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of DCMD.
Thus Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses wherein the ECC system and the VMD system are connected at the first condenser so that the feed stream is heated by the super-heated stream of the refrigerant at the first condenser before entering the feed chamber.
Regarding Claim 3 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, herein Song discloses wherein the evaporator 250 of the heat pump system is configured to provide cooling for the clean water chamber to condense the permeated water vapors therein (see [0057]; [0060]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid to use the evaporator to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Regarding Claim 4 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, wherein the VMD system further comprises an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein (Song discloses external cooling source for the MD is the evaporator 250, Fig. 1, [0057]-[0058]; Abu-Zeid similarly discloses a condenser that uses cold water and the external cooling source Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 5 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein an outlet of the second condenser is connected to an inlet of the first condenser so that the second condenser is configured to be cooled by the feed stream to condense the water vapors while pre-heating the feed stream before the feed stream enters the first condenser.
However, both Alkhulaifi and Song discloses the feed being heated by a condenser, supra, and Alkhulaifi discloses heating the feed with another heat exchanger (161) after the first condenser; Fig. 1A.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further heat the feed with additional condensers in the process, i.e. such as the second condenser, in order to further heat the feed and provide cooling to the condensers. Where specifically it would have been obvious to try passing the feed through the first or second condenser first before flowing to the other condenser, as this involves choosing between finite options which would both provide a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 6 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, wherein the ECC system further comprises a heater 190 that is configured to provide heat for the generator to generate the primary flow of the refrigerant; Alkhulaifi Fig. 1A, [0040].
Regarding Claim 7 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 6, wherein the heater 190 is configured to further heat the feed stream after the first condenser and before the feed chamber, via heat exchanger 161; Alkhulaifi Fig. 1A, [0039]-[0041].
Regarding Claim 10 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, wherein the ECC system further comprises a solar collector 190 that is configured to provide heat for the generator to generate the primary flow of the refrigerant; Alkhulaifi Fig. 1A, [0040].
Regarding Claim 11 Alkhulaifi discloses a desalination and cooling system (Abstract; Fig. 1A), comprising:
an ejector cooling cycle (ECC) system 170 ([0037], [0039]) comprising:
a generator 171 configured to generate a primary flow of a refrigerant ([0039]),
an evaporator 173 configured to provide cooling and provide a secondary flow of the refrigerant ([0039]),
an ejector 175 configured for the primary flow and the secondary flow to pass through to obtain a super-heated stream of the refrigerant ([0039]), and
a first condenser 177 configured to cool the super-heated stream of the refrigerant ([0039]), the first condenser inherently comprising a wall separating a hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the hot medium compartment configured to receive the super- heated stream of the refrigerant; and
a desalination system 160 configured to receive a feed stream 127 comprising water (see [0024]; [0039]),
wherein the ECC system and the desalination system are connected at the first condenser so that the feed stream is heated by the superheated stream of the refrigerant at the first condenser before entering the desalination system (see [0011]; [0024]; [0049]).
Alkhulaifi does not disclose that the desalination system is a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system.
However Song discloses a similar desalination system which is integrated with a heat pump, where the desalination system and the heat pump system are connected at a condenser of the heat pump system to preheat a feed stream (see [0003]; [0017]; [0019]; [0059]), including (for direct contact membrane distillation, DCMD) a feed chamber 122 configured to receive a feed stream comprising water, a cold water/permeate chamber 123 configured to receive water vapors, and a membrane 121 disposed between the feed chamber and the cold water/permeate chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the cold water/permeate chamber (Fig. 1). Song specifically discloses the membrane distillation system may be direct contact, air gap, or vacuum membrane distillation (VMD), where the benefit of such is that it does not require heating water up to the boiling point, so a lower operating temperature contributes to energy cost savings (see [0005]; [0022]; [0072]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi to substitute for the desalination system a vacuum membrane distillation system, as suggested by Song, i.e. whose feed is first heated in the first condenser of the ECC system, in order to provide an energy efficient desalination system.
Alkhulaifi in view of Song does not disclose the specific details of the vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system including a vacuum chamber and second condenser as claimed.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from a direct contact membrane distillation system in that instead of a cold water/permeate chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD thus comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song to implement the VMD system for desalination by including instead of a cold water/permeate chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of DCMD.
Thus Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses wherein the ECC system and the VMD system are connected at the first condenser so that the feed stream, in the cold medium compartment of the first condenser, is heated by the super- heated stream of the refrigerant to generate the water vapors. Thus the cold medium compartment of the first condenser of the ECC system is configured to receive a feed stream comprising water, and the membrane is seen to be disposed between the cold medium compartment and the vacuum chamber (i.e. because the cold medium compartment is upstream of the membrane which is upstream of the vacuum chamber and the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors to pass from the cold medium compartment (i.e. where some vapors will inherently originate during the heating in the condenser) the through the membrane to the vacuum chamber in the vacuum membrane distillation unit.
Regarding Claim 14 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, wherein: the generator, the ejector and the first condenser are configured to define a power cycle of the ECC system, and the evaporator, the ejector and the first condenser are configured to define a refrigeration cycle of the ECC system; Alkhulaifi [0016].
Regarding Claim 15 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, wherein Song discloses wherein the evaporator 250 of the heat pump system is configured to provide cooling for the clean water chamber to condense the permeated water vapors therein (see [0057]; [0060]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid to use the evaporator to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Regarding Claim 16 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, wherein the VMD system further comprises an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein (Song discloses external cooling source for the MD is the evaporator 250, Fig. 1, [0057]-[0058]; Abu-Zeid similarly discloses a condenser that uses cold water and the external cooling source Fig. 5).
Regarding Claim 17 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein an outlet of the second condenser is connected to an inlet of the first condenser so that the second condenser is configured to be cooled by the feed stream to condense the water vapors while pre-heating the feed stream before the feed stream enters the first condenser.
However, both Alkhulaifi and Song discloses the feed being heated by a condenser, supra, and Alkhulaifi discloses heating the feed with another heat exchanger (161) after the first condenser; Fig. 1A.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further heat the feed with additional condensers in the process, i.e. such as the second condenser, in order to further heat the feed and provide cooling to the condensers. Where specifically it would have been obvious to try passing the feed through the first or second condenser first before flowing to the other condenser, as this involves choosing between finite options which would both provide a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 18 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, wherein the ECC system further comprises a heater 190 that is configured to provide heat for the generator to generate the primary flow of the refrigerant; Alkhulaifi Fig. 1A, [0040].
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid further in view of US 3,664,145 (hereinafter “Johnson”).
Regarding Claim 2 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising: an enclosure, wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment.
However, Johnson discloses using a heat exchanger which uses three fluid streams in order to use two cold streams to cool on one hot saltwater feed stream, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger; Fig. 1, C3/L28-36, C4/L32-46, C6/L47-61, C7/L22-25; and thus discloses an enclosure, wherein a first heat exchanger comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, and a second heat exchanger comprises a second cold medium compartment and the hot medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second cold medium compartment. While Johnson discloses use two cold streams to cool one hot stream, one of skill in the art would understand the heat exchanger also functions to cool two hot streams with one cold steam (i.e. depending on which side of the heat exchanger is being considered, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid by integrating the first and second condensers into one heat exchanger/condenser which uses one cold medium compartment and two hot medium compartments as taught by Johnson in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger instead of two to reduce the amount of equipment. Thus resulting in a single enclosure which provides both the first and second condensers wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid further in view of US 2014/0263060 A1 (hereinafter “Summers”).
Regarding Claim 9 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the VMD system is a multi- effect distillation system.
However Summers discloses a multi-effect vacuum distillation system [0012], [020], [0041], which “ can provide a simple cycle in which many membrane modules and condensers can be cascaded at successively lower pressure as more vapor is removed from the feed and as the feed temperature decreases. By reducing the pressure step-wise over many stages, the feed can be preheated to a higher temperature in the condenser; [0019].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid by using for the VMD system a multi-effect VMD system as disclosed by Summers because this involves the simple substitution of similar VMD systems to obtain the predictable result of forming a successful desalination system and because the feed can be preheated to a higher temperature in the condenser to drive better efficiency/GOR.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid further in view of US 2015/0090647 A1 (hereinafter “Duke”).
Regarding Claims 12-13 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, but does not discloses (claim 12) further comprising an enclosure that houses the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber, or (claim 13) wherein the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber are arranged in succession in the enclosure.
However, Duke discloses a combined heat exchanger and membrane distillation system wherein an enclosure houses a hot medium compartment (for flowing hot process stream 14), a cold medium compartment (for flowing the vaporizing stream which is heated b the hot process stream 14)), a membrane (30) and a permeate chamber (for the condensing stream 20), wherein the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the permeate chamber are arranged in succession in the enclosure.; Fig. 3, [0051]; which allows the membrane distillation processes to be coupled with heat exchange functionality to provide a duel energy saving benefit for a chemical/industrial process [0016], increasing single pass recovery due to heat loss in the feed/cold medium channel being made up for by the hot medium [0059] and can be applied to vacuum membrane distillation [0023]; wherein for a vacuum membrane distillation system obviously the permeate chamber would be a vacuum chamber.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid by including the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber together housed in an enclosure, wherein the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber are arranged in succession in the enclosure as disclosed by Duke to provide a combined heat exchanger and membrane distillation system because this provides a duel energy saving benefit and increases single pass recovery due to heat loss in the feed/cold medium channel being made up for by the hot medium.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid further in view of US 2023/0271139 A1 (hereinafter “Floyd”) and Duke.
Regarding Claim 20 Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 11, but does not disclose wherein the vacuum chamber, the membrane, the cold medium compartment, and the hot medium compartment are cylindrical and concentrical and are arranged in succession along a radial direction.
However Floyd discloses a spiral wound membrane distillation module, which provides a permeate chamber (center tube for permeate collection 404), a membrane 426, and a feed/cold medium compartment 430, which are cylindrical and concentrical and are arranged in succession along a radial direction (Figs. 1A-B, 4A-B), which enables multi-effect membrane distillation in a simple, compact, cross-current spiral wound module [0019]. Where when applied to a vacuum membrane distillation device the permeate chamber would obviously be a vacuum chamber.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song and Abu-Zeid by forming the vacuum chamber, the membrane, the cold medium compartment to be cylindrical and concentrical and arranged in succession along a radial direction as disclosed by Floyd because this is a known alternative form of membrane distillation module and to enable multi-effect membrane distillation in a simple, compact, cross-current spiral wound module.
Alkhulaifi in view of Song, Abu-Zeid and Floyd does not disclose an additional heat exchange compartment (i.e. the claimed hot medium compartment), included in the module.
However, Duke discloses a combined heat exchanger and membrane distillation system wherein an enclosure houses a hot medium compartment (for flowing hot process stream 14), a cold medium compartment (for flowing the vaporizing stream which is heated b the hot process stream 14)), a membrane (30) and a permeate chamber (for the condensing stream 20), wherein the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the permeate chamber are arranged in succession in the enclosure.; Fig. 3, [0051]; which allows the membrane distillation processes to be coupled with heat exchange functionality to provide a duel energy saving benefit for a chemical/industrial process [0016], increasing single pass recovery due to heat loss in the feed/cold medium channel being made up for by the hot medium [0059] and can be applied to vacuum membrane distillation [0023]; wherein for a vacuum membrane distillation system obviously the permeate chamber would be a vacuum chamber.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Alkhulaifi in view of Song, Abu-Zeid and Floyd by including the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber together housed in an enclosure, wherein the hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment, the membrane and the vacuum chamber are arranged in succession in the enclosure as disclosed by Duke to provide a combined heat exchanger and membrane distillation system because this provides a duel energy saving benefit and increases single pass recovery due to heat loss in the feed/cold medium channel being made up for by the hot medium.
Where in the combined invention of Alkhulaifi in view of Song, Abu-Zeid, Floyd and Duke it would have been obvious to have the hot medium compartment be cylindrical and concentrical and arranged in succession with the vacuum chamber, the membrane, the cold medium compartment along a radial direction, as the other layers are as detailed supra.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The additional features of claims 8 and 19, including a heater that is configured to further heat the super-heated stream of the refrigerant before the super-heated stream of refrigerant enters the condenser, is considered to distinguish over the prior art.
Alkhulaifi does not disclose a heater intermediate the ejector and the condenser (the structural connections implied by the claim limitations because the super-heated stream of refrigerant only exists between then ejector and first condenser).
Al-Sulaiman et al (US 2022/0135438) is directed to a cooling and desalination system and is also relevant to the claimed invention. Al-Sulaiman discloses an ECC system 370 comprising a generator 371, an evaporator 373, an ejector 375, and a condenser 377 (see Figs. 3A, 3B). In addition, Al-Sulaiman discloses a heater 361 which is intermediate the ejector and the condenser (via lines 303, 303c), through which a super-heated stream of refrigerant flows prior to entering the condenser. However, contrary to the claimed configuration, the heater in Al-Sulaiman is configured to cool the super-heated stream prior to entering the condenser, i.e., the super-heated stream provides heat to the heater to pre-heat saline water feed stream (see [0064]).
There does not appear to be any teachings and/or suggestions which would lead a person of ordinary skill in the art to configure the heater to operate in the manner claimed, entailing further heating the super-heated stream prior to entering the condenser instead of removing heat, which is opposite to that disclosed in the prior art.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469261 in view of Abu-Zeid.
With regard to claims 1 and 11, ‘261 discloses all of the limaitons of claims 1 and 11 except that a sweep gas membrane distillation (SGMD) system is used instead of a VMD, and thus does not disclose a vacuum chamber.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from a SGMD system in that instead of a sweeping gas chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘261 to use a VMD system for desalination by including instead of a sweeping gas chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and using the second condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of SWMD.
Regarding dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20; ‘261 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 11, and dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 are nearly identical to the ‘261 dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20. Therefore, claims 2-10 and 12-20 are obvious in view of the use of VMD in the system of claims 1 and 11 disclosed by ‘261 in view of Abu-Zeid.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Claims 1, 6-14 and 18-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469182 in view of Abu-Zeid.
With regard to claims 1 and 11, ‘182 discloses all of the limaitons of claims 1 and 11 except that a permeate gap membrane distillation (PGMD) system is used instead of a VMD, and thus does not disclose a vacuum chamber or second condenser.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from an air gap membrane distillation AGMD system (i.e. similar to a PGMD) in that instead of a gap chamber and a cold water/coolant chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘182 to use a VMD system for desalination by including instead of a permeate gap chamber and coolant chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and using the second condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of SWMD.
Regarding dependent claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20; ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 11, and dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 are nearly identical to limitations in the ‘182 dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20. Therefore, claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20 are obvious in view of the use of VMD in the system of claims 1 and 11 disclosed by ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid.
Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469182 in view of Abu-Zeid and Johnson.
Regarding Claim 2 ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising: an enclosure, wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment.
However, Johnson discloses using a heat exchanger which uses three fluid streams in order to use two cold streams to cool on one hot saltwater feed stream, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger; Fig. 1, C3/L28-36, C4/L32-46, C6/L47-61, C7/L22-25; and thus discloses an enclosure, wherein a first heat exchanger comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, and a second heat exchanger comprises a second cold medium compartment and the hot medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second cold medium compartment. While Johnson discloses use two cold streams to cool one hot stream, one of skill in the art would understand the heat exchanger also functions to cool two hot streams with one cold steam (i.e. depending on which side of the heat exchanger is being considered, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid by integrating the first and second condensers into one heat exchanger/condenser which uses one cold medium compartment and two hot medium compartments as taught by Johnson in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger instead of two to reduce the amount of equipment. Thus resulting in a single enclosure which provides both the first and second condensers wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469182 in view of Abu-Zeid and Song.
Regarding Claim 3 and 15 ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose the limitations of claim 2.
However Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an evaporator 250 of a heat pump system is configured to provide cooling for the clean water chamber to condense the permeated water vapors therein (see [0057]; [0060]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid to use the evaporator to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Regarding Claim 4 and 16 ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein the VMD system further comprises an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein.
However, Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an external cooling source for the MD is provided by an evaporator 250; Fig. 1, [0057]-[0058].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid to use an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Claims 5 and 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469182 in view of Abu-Zeid and Alkhulaifi.
Regarding Claim 5 and 17 ‘182 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein an outlet of the second condenser is connected to an inlet of the first condenser so that the second condenser is configured to be cooled by the feed stream to condense the water vapors while pre-heating the feed stream before the feed stream enters the first condenser.
However, Alkhulaifi discloses the feed being heated by a condenser, supra, and further discloses heating the feed with another heat exchanger (161) after the first condenser; Fig. 1A.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further heat the feed with additional condensers in the process, i.e. such as the second condenser, in order to further heat the feed and provide cooling to the condensers. Where specifically it would have been obvious to try passing the feed through the first or second condenser first before flowing to the other condenser, as this involves choosing between finite options which would both provide a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1, 6-14 and 18-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-17 and 20 of copending Application No. 18469206 in view of Abu-Zeid.
With regard to claims 1 and 11, ‘206 discloses all of the limaitons of claims 1 and 11 except that a permeate gap membrane distillation (PGMD) system is used instead of a VMD, and thus does not disclose a vacuum chamber or second condenser.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from an direct contact membrane distillation system in that instead of a permeate chamber and a cold water/coolant chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘206 to use a VMD system for desalination by including instead of a permeate chamber and coolant chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and using the second condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of SWMD.
Regarding dependent claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20; ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 11, and dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20 are nearly identical to the limitations in ‘206 claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-17 and 20. Therefore, claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20 are obvious in view of the use of VMD in the system of claims 1 and 11 disclosed by ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid.
Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-17 and 20 of copending Application No. 18469206 in view of Abu-Zeid and Johnson.
Regarding Claim 2 ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising: an enclosure, wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment.
However, Johnson discloses using a heat exchanger which uses three fluid streams in order to use two cold streams to cool on one hot saltwater feed stream, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger; Fig. 1, C3/L28-36, C4/L32-46, C6/L47-61, C7/L22-25; and thus discloses an enclosure, wherein a first heat exchanger comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, and a second heat exchanger comprises a second cold medium compartment and the hot medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second cold medium compartment. While Johnson discloses use two cold streams to cool one hot stream, one of skill in the art would understand the heat exchanger also functions to cool two hot streams with one cold steam (i.e. depending on which side of the heat exchanger is being considered, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid by integrating the first and second condensers into one heat exchanger/condenser which uses one cold medium compartment and two hot medium compartments as taught by Johnson in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger instead of two to reduce the amount of equipment. Thus resulting in a single enclosure which provides both the first and second condensers wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-17 and 20 of copending Application No. 18469206 in view of Abu-Zeid and Song.
Regarding Claim 3 and 15 ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose the limitations of claim 2.
However Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an evaporator 250 of a heat pump system is configured to provide cooling for the clean water chamber to condense the permeated water vapors therein (see [0057]; [0060]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid to use the evaporator to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Regarding Claim 4 and 16 ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein the VMD system further comprises an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein.
However, Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an external cooling source for the MD is provided by an evaporator 250; Fig. 1, [0057]-[0058].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid to use an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Claims 5 and 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-17 and 20 of copending Application No. 18469206 in view of Abu-Zeid and Alkhulaifi.
Regarding Claim 5 and 17 ‘206 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein an outlet of the second condenser is connected to an inlet of the first condenser so that the second condenser is configured to be cooled by the feed stream to condense the water vapors while pre-heating the feed stream before the feed stream enters the first condenser.
However, Alkhulaifi discloses the feed being heated by a condenser, supra, and further discloses heating the feed with another heat exchanger (161) after the first condenser; Fig. 1A.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further heat the feed with additional condensers in the process, i.e. such as the second condenser, in order to further heat the feed and provide cooling to the condensers. Where specifically it would have been obvious to try passing the feed through the first or second condenser first before flowing to the other condenser, as this involves choosing between finite options which would both provide a reasonable expectation of success.
Claims 1, 6-14 and 18-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469288 in view of Abu-Zeid.
With regard to claims 1 and 11, ‘288 discloses all of the limaitons of claims 1 and 11 except that a permeate gap membrane distillation (PGMD) system is used instead of a VMD, and thus does not disclose a vacuum chamber or second condenser.
However, Abu-Zeid discloses a vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) system differs from an air gap membrane distillation AGMD system in that instead of an air gap chamber and a cold water/coolant chamber, there is a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and a condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate (Fig. 2, Secs. 2. and 3.), the VMD comprising:
a feed chamber configured to receive a feed stream comprising water,
a vacuum chamber configured to receive water vapors,
a membrane disposed between the feed chamber and the vacuum chamber, the membrane comprising a plurality of pores configured to allow the water vapors originating from the feed stream to pass from the feed chamber through the membrane to the vacuum chamber, and
a second condenser 7 configured to receive the water vapors from the vacuum chamber and condense the water vapors,
wherein the VMD system is connected solar thermal collector 10 so that the feed stream is heated before entering the feed chamber (Fig. 2, 4-5, Secs. 2. and 3.)
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘288 to use a VMD system for desalination by including instead of an air gap chamber and coolant chamber, a vacuum chamber on the side of the membrane opposite the feed chamber and using the second condenser for condensing the vacuum permeate as disclosed by Abu-Zeid, in order to provide VMD instead of SWMD.
Regarding dependent claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20; ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 11, and dependent claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20 are nearly identical to limitations in the ‘288 dependent claims 2-10 and 12-20. Therefore, claims 6-10, 12-14 and 18-20 are obvious in view of the use of VMD in the system of claims 1 and 11 disclosed by ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid.
Claim 2 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469288 in view of Abu-Zeid and Johnson.
Regarding Claim 2 ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising: an enclosure, wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment.
However, Johnson discloses using a heat exchanger which uses three fluid streams in order to use two cold streams to cool on one hot saltwater feed stream, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger; Fig. 1, C3/L28-36, C4/L32-46, C6/L47-61, C7/L22-25; and thus discloses an enclosure, wherein a first heat exchanger comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, and a second heat exchanger comprises a second cold medium compartment and the hot medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second cold medium compartment. While Johnson discloses use two cold streams to cool one hot stream, one of skill in the art would understand the heat exchanger also functions to cool two hot streams with one cold steam (i.e. depending on which side of the heat exchanger is being considered, in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid by integrating the first and second condensers into one heat exchanger/condenser which uses one cold medium compartment and two hot medium compartments as taught by Johnson in order to provide desired levels of heat exchange in one heat exchanger instead of two to reduce the amount of equipment. Thus resulting in a single enclosure which provides both the first and second condensers wherein: the first condenser comprises a first hot medium compartment and a cold medium compartment, the second condenser comprises a second hot medium compartment and the cold medium compartment, and the enclosure houses the first hot medium compartment, the cold medium compartment and the second hot medium compartment
Claims 3-4 and 15-16 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469288 in view of Abu-Zeid and Song.
Regarding Claim 3 and 15 ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose the limitations of claim 2.
However Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an evaporator 250 of a heat pump system is configured to provide cooling for the clean water chamber to condense the permeated water vapors therein (see [0057]; [0060]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid to use the evaporator to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Regarding Claim 4 and 16 ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein the VMD system further comprises an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein.
However, Song discloses a membrane distillation system wherein an external cooling source for the MD is provided by an evaporator 250; Fig. 1, [0057]-[0058].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid to use an external cooling source that is configured to provide cooling for the second condenser to condense the water vapors therein as disclosed by Song, in order to use the cooling effect of the evaporator to save energy in the system.
Claims 5 and 17 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18469288 in view of Abu-Zeid and Alkhulaifi.
Regarding Claim 5 and 17 ‘288 in view of Abu-Zeid discloses the desalination and cooling system of claims 1 and 11, but does not disclose wherein an outlet of the second condenser is connected to an inlet of the first condenser so that the second condenser is configured to be cooled by the feed stream to condense the water vapors while pre-heating the feed stream before the feed stream enters the first condenser.
However, Alkhulaifi discloses the feed being heated by a condenser, supra, and further discloses heating the feed with another heat exchanger (161) after the first condenser; Fig. 1A.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further heat the feed with additional condensers in the process, i.e. such as the second condenser, in order to further heat the feed and provide cooling to the condensers. Where specifically it would have been obvious to try passing the feed through the first or second condenser first before flowing to the other condenser, as this involves choosing between finite options which would both provide a reasonable expectation of success.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric J. McCullough whose telephone number is (571)272-8885. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00-6:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin L Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ERIC J MCCULLOUGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773